11^ 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



019 944 340 9 



Hollinger Corp. 



\ //>Ve^^^^^^>^'\^ <r "^^"^ 



PROPOSED ANNEXATION OF HAWAII. 



SPEECH 



HON. WILLIAM S^ESICK, 



OK IvlICtilGAN, 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 



M:onday, June 13, 1898. 



VSTASHINGXON. 

1898. 



jq, Co 






38517 



5^ 






b^ 



0( 



\^ 



Proposed Annexation of Hawaii. 



SPEECH 

OP ■ , 

HON. WILLIAM S. MESICK, 

of michigan, 
In the House of Eepresentatives, 

Monday, June IS, 1898. 

On the joint resolution (H. Res. 259) to provide for annexing the Hawaiian 
Islands to the United States. 

Mr. MESICK said: 

Mr. Speaker: Never has this country witnessed such a rapid 
and sweeping revolution of sentiment as has manifested itself in 
Congress and in all parts of this country since the outbreak of the 
war with Spain. . 

I admit that I was conservative on the question of annexing 
Hawaii prior to the declaration of war, but, through the force of 
unexpected events, I am to-day a stanch advocate of the proposi- 
tion to annex these islands. 

From the day that the Spanish fleet was destroyed and went 
down before the guns of the American squadron at Manila, which 
squadron was commanded by that splendid and heroic officer 
Commodore Dewey, a new purpose took hold of the people of the 
United States. We were brought suddenly to a realization of our 
power on the seas as well as upon the land, and it now becomes 
our manifest duty to possess the Hawaiian Islands. 

Public attention has been called to a question of public neces- 
sity, and it is the judgment of the best minds and statesmen of 
to-day that now is the accepted time to take what has been offered 
to us. 

There are many good and sufficient reasons why the Hawaiian 
Islands should be in the possession of the United States, but the 
principal one is because of their strategic importance. 

Hawaii is the only spot in the Pacific, from the equator on the 
south to Alaska on the north and between America on the east 
and Asia on the west where water, food, or coal can be obtained. 

It is also on or near the principal trade routes across the Pacific. 
Its unique position is what has given it the names of " the cross- 
roads of the Pacific," "the key of the Pacific,"' and " the Gibral- 
tar of the Pacific. " Hence we readily see the strategic iniportance 
in case of war with any stronger naval power. 

In the possession of an enemy, they would serve as a secure base 
for attacking any and all of our Pacific coast cities. In our pos- 
session, they would shut out and bar the enemy's fleet of all oppor- 
tunities for coaling, food, supplies, repairs, or harbor protection. 

Shall we leave these islands for some other country? The Ameri- 
3591 3 



can people answer no. I know that I speak the sentiments of my 
'constituency in the Eleventh Congressional district of the State of 
Michigan when 1 say tiiat the time has now come when we should 
no longer hesitate on this question, and that they are willing to 
accept "their share of the responsibility attending the annexation 
of the islands and the control of them in the futiire, notwithstand- 
ing the opposition of the Democratic constitutional lawyers who 
occupy seats in the House of Representatives. 

The opponents to the proposed annexation of Hawaii tell us "it 
is the entering wedge for the annexation of the Philippine Islands, 
the Canaries, Porto Rico. Cuba; conquest, sea power, complica- 
tions and alliances with European nations, a billion-dollar navy, 
a large and costly standing army, new war debts, the undermin- 
ing of the Monroe doctrine, the interruption of industries and 
commerce, and a setback to the forward march of civilization." 

I do not commit myself to any such policy when I give my vote 
in favor of the pending resolution. 

The value of the Hawaiian Islands to this country for military 
and naval purposes, it seems to me, is beyond a question of doubt 
and can not satisfactorily be denied. 

I quote from a letter written by GJ-eneral Schofield, of the United 
States Army: 

Letter from J. M. Schofield, of St. Augustine, Fla., to Hon. John T. Morgan, 
relative to annexation of the Hawaiian Islands. 

Our national interests should be secured by the exclusive right to occupy. 
Improve, and fortify Pearl Eiver Harbor so as to insure our possession of that 
harbor in time of war. 

To illustrate my views on this subject. I have likened that harbor to a 
commanding position in front of a defensive line which an army in the field 
i& compelled to occupy. The army must occupy that advanced position and 
hold it at whatever cost, or else the enemy will occupy it with his artillery, 
and thus dominate the main line. If we do not occupy and fortify Pearl River 
Harbor, our enemy will occtipy it as a base from which to conduct operations 
against our Pacific coast and the isthmian canal, which must of course in due 
time be constructedgand controlled by this country. The possession of such 
a base at a convenient distance from our Pacific coast would be a great temp- 
tation to an unfriendly nation to undertake hostile operations against us. 

One of the greatest advantages of Pearl Eiver Harbor to us consists in the 
fact that no navy would be required to defend it It is a deep, landlocked 
arm of the sea, easily defended by fortifications placed near its mouth, with 
its anchorage beyond the reach of guns from the ocean. Cruisers or other 
war ships which might be overpowered at sea, as well as merchant vessels, 
would find there behind the land defenses absolute security against a naval 
• attack. A moderate garrison of regular troops, with the militia on the island, 
would give sufficient protection against any landing jmrties from a hostile 
fleet. Of course an army on transports, supp(jrted by a powerful fleet, could 
land and capture the place, but that would be an expensive operation, one 
much less likely to be undertaken than the occupation of an undefended har- 
bor, as a necessary preliminary to an attack on our coast or upon our com- 
meroe. 

The value of such a place of refuge and of supplies for our merchant marine 
and our cruisers in time of war can hardly be overestimated, yet the greatest 
value to us of that wonderful harbor consists in the fact that its possession 
and adequate defense by us prevents the possibility of an enemy using it 
against us. 

So far as I know, the leading statesmen, no less than the military and naval 
authorities of this country, have always been in accord on this subject. While 
at has not been proposed to interfere with the continued occupation by for- 
eign nations of their military strongholds in this hemisphere, it has been 
publicly and emphatically declared that none of those strongholds shall ever 
be allowed to pass into the possession of any other nation whose interests 
might be antagonistic to ours. Now for the first time the occasion has 
arisen for carrying into effect our long-declared national policy. 

A little State like Hawaii can not stand alone among the great nations, all 
of whom covet her incomparable harbor. She must have the protection of 
this country or some other great nation. But a protectorate without sov- 
ereignty is the last thing this country could afford to assume. In the ab- 
sence of authority to regulate and control the intercourse between the 



islands aud other countries controversies must arise wliich would lead to 
war or to the loss of our invaluable military possession in the islands. No 
halfway measures will suffice. We must accept the islands and hold and 
govern them or else let some other great nation do it. To fail now to carry 
into effect our own great national policy upon the first occasion offered to us 
would, in my judgment, be one of those blunders which are worse than 
crimes. 

To my mind what may be regarded perhaps as the sentimental aspect of 
the question is entitled to consideration. A colony of intelligent, virtuous, 
and patriotic Americans have rescued a country from barbarism and raised 
it to a high state of civilization and prosperity, until in the natural course of 
events the government of that country has fallen entirely into their hands. 
They now ask the privilege of adding that country to their own native land; 
of returning with their new possessions to the parental fold. Can they be 
turned away to seek a home among strangers? Not without violating one of 
the most sacred laws of nature and incurring the penalty which must, sooner 
or later, necessarily follow. 

I am, dear Senator, with great respect, sincerely, yours, 

J. M. SCHOFIELD. 
Hon. John T. Morgan, 

United States Senate, Washington, D. C. 

It is not possible to tell where a war will take the victor. For 
the defeated and vanquished there is disappointment, loss, and 
long, dreary j^ears of povertj^ and bankruptcy. But with the 
successful it is different. With success come new conditions and 
new issues and more extensive opportunities. 

The people of the United States did not enter upon war for con- 
quest. They did not have the remotest idea of such a thing. It 
was in the interest of humanity and not for conquest, but as a 
natural consequence we will be confronted with important ques- 
tions pertaining to the disposition of the fruits of war. 

Success will be ours, and we will come into possession of Porto 
Rico, the Philippines, and probably other colonial possessions of 
the enemy. And when that time does come. I have faith in the 
wisdom, patriotism, and state.smanship of our people to arrive 
at a proper solution of the question. You may always trust the 
American people to meet every emergency, and this one will be 
met promptly, fairly, and justly. 

I represent a district in the middle of the State of Michigan, 
which has no fear of cannon shot from a man-of-war. Yet the 
people of my district are fully as much interested in building up 
the American Navy as their more exposed neighbors along the 
Atlantic and Pacific coasts. 

Never in our history has the American Navy been nearer to the 
hearts of the American people than at this day. 

John Adams once said that "naval power is the natural defense 
of the United States." 

Our Navy has been neglected, and when it became necessary to 
call it into action we presented a sad spec'acle racing all over 'the 
world for any kind of ships to press into the service. 

The Republican party, in its national platform adopted at St. 
Louis in 1896, pledged itself to the building up of the American 
merchant marine in these words: 

We favor the early American policy of discriminating duties for the up- 
building of our merchant marine and the protection of our ships in the for- 
eign carrying trade, so that American ships, the product of American labor 
employed in American shipyards, sailing under the Stars and Stripes, and 
manned, officered, and owned by Americans, may regain the carrying of our 
foreign commerce. 

We need a navy to protect our seacoasts, to protect the rights 
of American citizens in every port and harbor, and to protect our 
commerce along our coasts and with foreign countries. 

During the past year our foreign commerce reached the sum of 
3591 



$3,000,000,000. It is impossible to btiild up a commerce on the 
high seas and retain it without a navy to protect it. The Navy is 
its natural ally. 

At the present time the condition of our merchant marine is deplorable. 
In 1825 Webster said: "We have a commerce which leaves no seas unex- 
plored, and navies which take no law from superior force." At that time 93 
per cent of the foreign carrying trade of this country was borne in American 
ships; in 1830, 90 per cent; in 18:35, 85 per cent; in IS-tO, 83 per cent; in 1845, 81 
per cent; in 1850, 73 per cent: in 1855, 75 per cent; in ISiiO, before the war, 66 
per cent; in 1865, only 28 per cent, a loss of 38 per cent in those five years. 

These facts testify to the truth expressed by Sir Charles Wilson, an Eng- 
lish authority, when he stated: "If there is one point clearer than another 
in the history of commeice.it is this, that when a State can not effectually 
protect its carrying trade in time of war, that trade passes from it and does 
not return." 

In 1870 our ships handled 35 per cent otf the carrying trade; in 1875. 26 per 
cent: in 1880, 18 per cent; in 1885, 17i- per cent; in 1890, 13 per cent; in 1895, 
nearly 12 per cent, and in 1897 we reached the lowest figure, of about 11^ per 
cent. 

Closely identified with holding up our Navy and merchant ma- 
rine is the importance of annexation of Hawaii and the building 
of the Nicaragua Canal. 

As to the departure from the policy of our forefathers, of which 
the opposition have so much to say and so often quote, I have to 
say this: Americans revere the names of Washington, Madison, 
Jefferson, and Monroe. They were wise men in their day and 
generation; patriots who shaped and established the fundamental 
principles of our great institutions. They builded well, and the 
free people enjoy the blessings that have grown from the seed they 
sowed, have placed their names in the American temple of fame, 
and have siirrounded them with imperishable garlands of patri- 
otic remembrance. But they have passed from the scene of ac- 
tion; their good works live after them, but much of their wisdom, 
diplomacy, and national policy is not for these days, when we are 
engaged in a war with Spain, and should be revised and readjusted. 

The war with Spain will develop a new policy and overturn 
many ancient ideas of national policy and bring the people of the 
United States i:5to a broader view of their own national affairs as 
they bear upon the progress of the world. 

The " traditions of our fathers " do not fit into the whirl of 
modern events or adjust themselves to the world s modern progress 
anymore than the flintlock miiskets of our Revolutionary fathers 
would now prevail against the Mauser rifles of the Spanish army, 
or the battle ships of 1812 against the modern battle ships of to- 
day which are engaged in the Spanish- American naval war. 

The people of this country, under the guidance of Divine Provi- 
dence, are making history. They are prosecuting a war that 
shakes the world from center to' circumference and is fraught 
with stupendous possibilities. This is a righteous war. " It in- 
volves the disinthrallment of millions of our fellow-beings from 
oppression, the overthrow of the haughty dynasty, and the rais- 
ing of this great Republic to a position of power among the na- 
tions of the world. That position once gained, as gained it will 
be, must be maintained. The American nation is powerful 
enough to maintain itself wherever it plants its flag. 

That flag is an emblem of what we are and of what we hope to 
be, and when it is planted over the Hawaiian Islands, as it will be 
in the near future, it will mean universal edncation. light for 
every mind, knowledge for every child. It will mean that every 
citizen of those islands, native or otherwise, must be protected at 
home, in every State abroad, in every land, on every sea, and in 



every port and harbor. It will mean that all distinctions based 
on birth or blood have perished from our laws, that our Govern- 
ment shall stand between labor and capital, between the weak 
and the strong, between want and wealth, and give and guarantee 
simple justice to all. We are bound to gain a great victory for 
our rights; let us hasten that victory by the annexation of the 
Hawaiian Islands. 



''iiiiiiil ., 

019 944 340 9 1 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



019 944 340 9 • 



Hollinger Corp. 
pH8.5 



8 9' 10 



J 13 



40 



